§
Subdivision 1.Recording.
At the beginning of the action the plaintiff shall file for record with the county recorder or, if registered land, with the registrar of titles of the county in which it is brought, and of the several counties if the lien be claimed under section 514.04, a notice of the pendency thereof, embracing therein a copy of the summons, omitting the caption.
§
Subd. 2.One action for all.
After such filing, no other action shall be commenced for the enforcement of any lien arising from the improvement described, but all such lienholders shall intervene in the original action by answer, as provided in section 514.11. Any such lienholder not named as a defendant may answer the complaint and be admitted as a party. If more than one action shall be commenced in good faith, all shall be consolidated and tried as one, under such order of the court as may best protect the rights of all parties concerned.
§
Subd. 3.One-year limitation.
No lien shall be enforced in any case unless the holder thereof shall assert the same, either by filing a complaint or answer with the court administrator, within one year after the date of the last item of the claim as set forth in the recorded lien statement; and, no person shall be bound by any judgment in such action unless made a party thereto within the year; and, as to a bona fide purchaser, mortgagee, or encumbrancer without notice, the absence from the record of a notice of lis pendens of an action after the expiration of the year in which the lien could be so asserted shall be conclusive evidence that the lien may no longer be enforced and, in the case of registered land, the registrar of titles shall refrain from carrying forward to new certificates of title the memorials of lien statements when no such notice of lis pendens has been registered within the period.
Notes of Decisions
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. Jag Investments, Inc., 634 N.W.2d 176 (Minn. 2001).
· cites it 86× “effectively served JAG in a mechanics' lien action even though Ryan failed to serve JAG within the one-year time limit imposed by Minn.Stat. § 514.12, subd. 3 (2000). JAG also contends that the court of appeals erred when it failed to dismiss respondent GMH Asphalt Corporation's…”
Mavco, Inc. v. Eggink, 739 N.W.2d 148 (Minn. 2007).
· cites it 68× “Mavco later learned of Wells Fargo’s mortgage but did not join Wells Fargo in its foreclosure action within the one-year timeframe set forth in Minn.Stat. § 514.12, subd. 3 (2006). In the meantime, Mavco and the Egginks reached a mediated settlement, but the Egginks failed to…”
Mavco, Inc. v. Eggink, 720 N.W.2d 841 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 47× “[*] On appeal in this mechanic's lien foreclosure action, appellant construction company argues that (1) respondent mortgagee is not protected by the statute of limitations in Minn.Stat. § 514.12, subd. 3 (2004), because the mortgage was issued after appellant's mechanic's lien…”
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, 785 N.W.2d 753 (Minn. 2010).
· cites it 2× “08 (2008); and (3) file a lis pendens notice and commence an action against the owner within one year after the last work or materials provided, Minn.Stat. § 514.12 (2008). In re Zachman Homes, Inc.”
Eclipse Architectural Grp., Inc. v. Lam, 814 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 2× “03 to amendment of *700 pleadings in a mechanic’s lien foreclosure action under Minn.Stat. § 514.12 (2010)); Guillaume & Assocs.”
Ryan Contracting Co. v. O'Neill & Murphy, LLP, 883 N.W.2d 236 (Minn. 2016).
· cites it 2× “Notice consists of either notice in a written contract, a copy of which is provided to the owner, or other written notice in the form required' by the’ statute. Id. Additionally, the lién claimant must file a proper statement of claim within 120 days of the last work or…”
Odunlade v. City of Minneapolis, 823 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 2× “Specifically, the Legislature extended and clarified the meaning of section 278.01 in section 278.02 to allow a petitioner to bring a petition challenging the tax assessments upon multiple parcels of land upon which the petitioner has an interest.”
Thompson Plumbing Co. v. J.E.C., Inc., 422 N.W.2d 26 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 6× “The trial court determined appellant could not pursue its mechanics’ lien claim because it did not serve respondent within a year of its last item of work and thus did not timely make respondent a party to the action as required by Minn.Stat. § 514.12, subd. 3 (1986). It also…”
Marque Plumbing, Inc. v. Barris, 380 N.W.2d 174 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 4× “In reference to the lis pendens, Minn. Stat. § 514.12 , subd. 3 (1982) provides in part: [A]s to a bona fide purchaser, mortgagee, or encumbrancer without notice, the absence from the record of a notice of lis pendens of an action after the expiration of the year in which the…”
Enviro-Fab, Inc. v. Blandin Paper Co., 349 N.W.2d 842 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 514.12, subd. 3 provides that “no lien shall be enforced in any ease unless the holder thereof shall assert the same ⅜ * * within one year after the date of the last item of his claim as set forth in the recorded lien statement ⅜ * *.”
Minnesota Wood Specialties, Inc. v. Mattson, 274 N.W.2d 116 (Minn. 1978).
“Minnesota Wood commenced this action to foreclose its lien in February 1976, within a year after it had furnished the last item for which the lien was claimed, as is required by § 514.12, subd. 3. Acoustics, named a defendant, also sought timely foreclosure of its lien.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.